Page 4 of 5

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 23 Apr 2014, 10:36am
by Guy951
leftpoole wrote:UPDATE
Following this topic I feel that the below link should make someone laugh at the very leaset!!!
John

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... _friendly/

I found this quite telling:
Police statistics for the past five years show there were nine pedestrians hit by cyclists between January 2008 and December 2012 and none of these incidents occurred in pedestrian areas.

In the same period, 638 cyclists were hit by vehicles and last year Bournemouth was labelled the second most dangerous place for cyclists outside of London.

With drivers like that around, who wouldn't ride on the path?

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 23 Apr 2014, 10:55am
by mjr
And that's with an unhelpful effect at work, too: if a council bans cycles from a street, most of those who continue to ride there are less likely to obey other laws/directions like giving way to pedestrians. There will be a few protestors like one of our councillors who disagrees with the decisions not to open a couple of quiet one-way and loading-only town centre streets to two-way cycling (shortening routes significantly and avoiding the stations gyratory) and rides them anyway, but generally it'll be the more reckless riders bombing on through.

Against that backdrop, no incidents in Bournemouth pedestrian zone is even more impressive.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 23 Apr 2014, 1:24pm
by leftpoole
Guy951 wrote:
leftpoole wrote:UPDATE
Following this topic I feel that the below link should make someone laugh at the very leaset!!!
John

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... _friendly/

I found this quite telling:
Police statistics for the past five years show there were nine pedestrians hit by cyclists between January 2008 and December 2012 and none of these incidents occurred in pedestrian areas.

In the same period, 638 cyclists were hit by vehicles and last year Bournemouth was labelled the second most dangerous place for cyclists outside of London.

With drivers like that around, who wouldn't ride on the path?


Hello,
I stick to the roads, but I am a very experienced road user ..I still feel more cycles on the road would help 'the cause'
Re The present 'government' I love the comment.
Best regards,
John

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 23 Apr 2014, 9:38pm
by gaz
TRL Report PR 15, 1993, Cycling in Pedestrian Areas, concluded that cyclists and pedestrians mix well in "pedestrianised high streets and shopping areas".
It's only taken Bournemouth 21 years to catch up on the research :lol: , still much faster than some :roll: .

Cyclists are unlikely to be moving faster than pedestrians running and the risks of conflict are largely perceived rather than real. It should also be no harder to prosecute someone for careless/dangerous cycling than it is to prosecute them for violating a TRO prohibiting vehicles/cycles.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 8:47am
by leftpoole
gaz wrote:TRL Report PR 15, 1993, Cycling in Pedestrian Areas, concluded that cyclists and pedestrians mix well in "pedestrianised high streets and shopping areas".
It's only taken Bournemouth 21 years to catch up on the research :lol: , still much faster than some :roll: .

Cyclists are unlikely to be moving faster than pedestrians running and the risks of conflict are largely perceived rather than real. It should also be no harder to prosecute someone for careless/dangerous cycling than it is to prosecute them for violating a TRO prohibiting vehicles/cycles.


Hi
Cyclists unlikely to be moving faster than pedestrians you said?
Come and live here is 'Sunny Dorset' Bournemouth/Christchurch.............
More exciting cycling on pavement news below.
John


http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... ng_attack/

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 9:08am
by Mark1978
beardy wrote:
PS: I had already taken a 65 mile route over hilly terrain instead of the flat direct 55 mile route, in order to avoid upsetting too many motorists with my presence.


That's nearly always the choice around here. Either quiet roads with lots of climbing or flat with lots of traffic.

One way around the issue is cycling on the pavements which are often alongside the flat but busy main roads. Such as I did alongside the A66 East of Darlington just yesterday. It was a shared use path and I didn't meet any pedestrians except for the highways agency landscapers.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 11:20am
by TonyR
We really need to get rid of this local authority schizophrenia about cycling and pavements. Half the time they (along with the Highway Code) are encouraging us to cycle on them after they have applied no more than a bit of white paint and blue signs to an otherwise perfectly ordinary bit of pavement. The other half they are castigating and prosecuting cyclists for cycling on bits of pavements without the white paint.

I have seen no evidence that those have been chosen for conversion to shared use have anything about them that makes them specially suitable - they are wide and narrow, busy and quiet, past shops and in the countryside, maintained or breaking up...... So either pavements are all good to cycle on or none of them are. I just wish they'd make up their minds which it is.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 1:52pm
by mjr
No no no... the local authority encouraging people to cycle on footways that fall below the minimum standards for shared use is the left hand.

The police castigating and fining for riding on other footways, some of which are better than the shared use ones, is the right hand.

We need to introduce the left hand to the right hand... then make both listen to the brains of CTC and CN :-)

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 3:33pm
by Vantage
This just occurred to me, but as much as I personally don't agree with pavement cycling unless its special circumstances, like keeping my 10yo and 7yo daughters off the road and alive, if peds are gonna complain about it, can I then complain about said peds who walk all over MY cyclepath when there's a perfectly useable footpath right next to it? And can I also complain and whine about said peds who've parked their cars all over the footpath when I'm walking with my kids?

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 3:40pm
by mjr
IrishBill76 wrote:can I then complain about said peds who walk all over MY cyclepath when there's a perfectly useable footpath right next to it?

You can complain, but no-one will care. I am still facing attempts to build footpaths between cycleways and roads when we've seen time and time again that people will walk as far away from the road as they can - on the cycleway - so it would be better to spend money widening that, rather than building a useless footpath between the two... but no, residents say they don't want to walk near those smelly aggressive cyclists and honestly would rather walk right next to those nice clean quiet cars hammering up the road. :shock:
And can I also complain and whine about said peds who've parked their cars all over the footpath when I'm walking with my kids?

Parking on the footpath is not a crime as long as it isn't actually obstructing anyone. It's the driving on the footway which is an offence but everyone parks their car by lifting it up and placing it there, as any police officer or court will tell you. ;-)

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 24 Apr 2014, 5:25pm
by reohn2
leftpoole wrote:More exciting cycling on pavement news below.
John


http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/1 ... ng_attack/


Other than the victim of this despicable robbery riding a bicycle,what exactly does it have to do this thread? :?

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 25 Apr 2014, 8:30am
by kwackers
reohn2 wrote:Other than the victim of this despicable robbery riding a bicycle,what exactly does it have to do this thread? :?

She was cycling too slow on the pavement, at 25mph nobody stops you to ask for the time. :wink:

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 25 Apr 2014, 9:16am
by Postboxer
Was she on the pavement? It is a despicable crime though, filthy scum!

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 25 Apr 2014, 9:20am
by kwackers
Postboxer wrote:Was she on the pavement? It is a despicable crime though, filthy scum!

An assumption on my part, I don't actually know.

Re: 'Real' Cyclists as opposed to people riding cycles?

Posted: 25 Apr 2014, 9:25am
by reohn2
kwackers wrote:
Postboxer wrote:Was she on the pavement? It is a despicable crime though, filthy scum!

An assumption on my part, I don't actually know.

Nor me,nor the OP,going off the linked report :?